dsi1 wrote:

> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 8:11:29 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> > Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >
> > > On 6/21/2020 12:35 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> > > >> dsi1 wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Sure, why not use a reminder of a horrible past to sell product? What's the harm? Let's change the pancake box mascot to Cousin Anne and sell product aimed at holocaust survivors and neo-nazis. Yeah, that might make some profits for the company. In the end, profits are the only thing that matter.
> > > >>
> > > >> True. In the end, profits DO matter.
> > > >> Don't you have a retirement account? Investing your savings
> > > >> for retirement in evil corporations and hoping they will
> > > >> earn you the best return?
> > > >>
> > > >> As far as past reminders of our history, let's tear down
> > > >> all reminders of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
> > > >> USAs most beloved past presidents. That's just to name
> > > >> a few.
> > > >>
> > > >> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces
> > > >> from all currency, tear down their preserved mansions
> > > >> and monuments. Even Lincoln was a racist. He freed
> > > >> the blacks but he had no love for them.
> > > >> We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
> > > >>
> > > >> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying
> > > >> is just that...crap. Time to move on people and quit
> > > >> bitching about the past that can't be changed.
> > > >>
> > > >> And in the black community, clean up your own act then
> > > >> the police won't go so hard on you.
> > > >
> > > > My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically, she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
> > > >
> > > People that actually know history also know Washington freed his slaves.
> > > They don't hold grudges against everything that happened over 200
> > > years ago. It was never right to own slaves but it was not seen that
> > > way at the time. Same as many other habits and traditions from the
> > > past. We pretty much got rid of human sacrifice and cannibalism too.
> > >
> > > Despite having been an active slave holder for 56 years, George
> > > Washington struggled with the institution of slavery and spoke
> > > frequently of his desire to end the practice. At the end of his life,
> > > Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will -
> > > the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
> > >
> > > Jefferson only freed a handful but made some attempts to treat them ore
> > > humanely.
> >
> >
> > Thank you...
> >
> > Historical revisionism can be extended to absurd lengths, any past historical figure can be held up to scrutiny, but we have the luxury of hindsight, they did not. FDR interned the Japanese, but he led us through the Depression and WWII...Churchill was a "colonialist" and held what we now know are racist views but he led the UK and the Allied alliance through WWII...LBJ had segregationist views, but when he became POTUS he pushed through important civil rights legislation...and a million more examples.
> >
> > My "metric" is "Did these figures leave the world a better place?"...the above examples, despite their flaws, did on - balance IMNSHO...
> >
> > There is a current discussion on an East German history FB group I participate in, it is about the Lenin statue just erected by a far - left group in a small German town. Some on the group are defending Lenin, claiming that the Bolsheviks "despite their flaws" made the USSR into a modern nation, others say (myself among them, though I am not in the discussion anymore) that his bloody tactics led to the 100 million dead that communism/socialism are responsible for. Their are similar arguments for Stalin, that despite the purges and the millions dead by his hand, that he led the USSR to victory over the Nazis. Same arguements I've seen about Castro, etc....and there are still a few odd ducks out there who actually *defend* the building of the Berlin Wall...and so on!
> >
> > Lenin, Castro and their ilk have NOT left the world a better place overall according to my historial metrics, so they should be condemned and not nicely commemorated...
> >
> > Thing is, many in their "rush to historical judgement" do not know history, thus we have the present - day US "progressives" dissing Washington, Jefferson, even Lincoln. And some BLM and other activists disrespect the actions of MLK, Rosa Parks, Marian Anderson, many others...
> >
> > I'm just sayin...
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> > --
> > Best
> > Greg
>
> Indeed, you are just sayin. People's "metrics" are mostly rationalizations so they can see the world the way that need to. Every country will see their history and historical figures in whichever way that need to.

[...]

"In the end, whether one views things in the past in a favorable light or not matters about as much as what their favorite color is..."


An inane statement on your part...you've a very "flip" attitude towards life...

--
Best
Greg

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
> > with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> >
> > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
> > a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
> > breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
> > Aunt like her.
>
> Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
> line?
>
> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
> that of getting rid of her.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:47:10 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 8:11:29 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> > > Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 6/21/2020 12:35 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> > > > >> dsi1 wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Sure, why not use a reminder of a horrible past to sell product? What's the harm? Let's change the pancake box mascot to Cousin Anne and sell product aimed at holocaust survivors and neo-nazis. Yeah, that might make some profits for the company. In the end, profits are the only thing that matter.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> True. In the end, profits DO matter.
> > > > >> Don't you have a retirement account? Investing your savings
> > > > >> for retirement in evil corporations and hoping they will
> > > > >> earn you the best return?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As far as past reminders of our history, let's tear down
> > > > >> all reminders of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
> > > > >> USAs most beloved past presidents. That's just to name
> > > > >> a few.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces
> > > > >> from all currency, tear down their preserved mansions
> > > > >> and monuments. Even Lincoln was a racist. He freed
> > > > >> the blacks but he had no love for them.
> > > > >> We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying
> > > > >> is just that...crap. Time to move on people and quit
> > > > >> bitching about the past that can't be changed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And in the black community, clean up your own act then
> > > > >> the police won't go so hard on you.
> > > > >
> > > > > My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically, she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
> > > > >
> > > > People that actually know history also know Washington freed his slaves.
> > > > They don't hold grudges against everything that happened over 200
> > > > years ago. It was never right to own slaves but it was not seen that
> > > > way at the time. Same as many other habits and traditions from the
> > > > past. We pretty much got rid of human sacrifice and cannibalism too.
> > > >
> > > > Despite having been an active slave holder for 56 years, George
> > > > Washington struggled with the institution of slavery and spoke
> > > > frequently of his desire to end the practice. At the end of his life,
> > > > Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will -
> > > > the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
> > > >
> > > > Jefferson only freed a handful but made some attempts to treat them ore
> > > > humanely.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank you...
> > >
> > > Historical revisionism can be extended to absurd lengths, any past historical figure can be held up to scrutiny, but we have the luxury of hindsight, they did not. FDR interned the Japanese, but he led us through the Depression and WWII...Churchill was a "colonialist" and held what we now know are racist views but he led the UK and the Allied alliance through WWII....LBJ had segregationist views, but when he became POTUS he pushed through important civil rights legislation...and a million more examples.
> > >
> > > My "metric" is "Did these figures leave the world a better place?"...the above examples, despite their flaws, did on - balance IMNSHO...
> > >
> > > There is a current discussion on an East German history FB group I participate in, it is about the Lenin statue just erected by a far - left group in a small German town. Some on the group are defending Lenin, claiming that the Bolsheviks "despite their flaws" made the USSR into a modern nation, others say (myself among them, though I am not in the discussion anymore) that his bloody tactics led to the 100 million dead that communism/socialism are responsible for. Their are similar arguments for Stalin, that despite the purges and the millions dead by his hand, that he led the USSR to victory over the Nazis. Same arguements I've seen about Castro, etc....and there are still a few odd ducks out there who actually *defend* the building of the Berlin Wall...and so on!
> > >
> > > Lenin, Castro and their ilk have NOT left the world a better place overall according to my historial metrics, so they should be condemned and not nicely commemorated...
> > >
> > > Thing is, many in their "rush to historical judgement" do not know history, thus we have the present - day US "progressives" dissing Washington, Jefferson, even Lincoln. And some BLM and other activists disrespect the actions of MLK, Rosa Parks, Marian Anderson, many others...
> > >
> > > I'm just sayin...
> > >
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best
> > > Greg
> >
> > Indeed, you are just sayin. People's "metrics" are mostly rationalizations so they can see the world the way that need to. Every country will see their history and historical figures in whichever way that need to.
>
> [...]
>
> "In the end, whether one views things in the past in a favorable light or not matters about as much as what their favorite color is..."
>
>
> An inane statement on your part...you've a very "flip" attitude towards life...
>
> --
> Best
> Greg

So you think Stalin is one cool cat. So whaddaya want - medal?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesro.../#162fd4ee3366

dsi1 wrote:

> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
> > > with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> > >
> > > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
> > > a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
> > > breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
> > > Aunt like her.
> >
> > Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
> > line?
> >
> > Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
> > that of getting rid of her.
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
>
> Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.


You obviously do not understand the process of a market economy...

--
Best
Greg

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:54:53 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
> > > > with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> > > >
> > > > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
> > > > a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
> > > > breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
> > > > Aunt like her.
> > >
> > > Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
> > > line?
> > >
> > > Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
> > > that of getting rid of her.
> > >
> > > Cindy Hamilton
> >
> > Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
>
>
> You obviously do not understand the process of a market economy...
>
> --
> Best
> Greg

Sounds like your breakfasts ain't gonna be no fun anymore now that your mammy's not going to be around. Tough titties!

On 6/21/2020 3:49 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
>>> with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
>>>
>>> Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
>>> a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
>>> breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
>>> Aunt like her.
>>
>> Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
>> line?
>>
>> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
>> that of getting rid of her.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
> Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
>
Then why change it? It was put there for a reason but now they are
pandering for profit. Product recognition is good but now it has to
change.

On 6/21/2020 2:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 7:45:22 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 6/21/2020 12:35 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, why not use a reminder of a horrible past to sell product? What's the harm? Let's change the pancake box mascot to Cousin Anne and sell product aimed at holocaust survivors and neo-nazis. Yeah, that might make some profits for the company. In the end, profits are the only thing that matter.
>>>>
>>>> True. In the end, profits DO matter.
>>>> Don't you have a retirement account? Investing your savings
>>>> for retirement in evil corporations and hoping they will
>>>> earn you the best return?
>>>>
>>>> As far as past reminders of our history, let's tear down
>>>> all reminders of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
>>>> USAs most beloved past presidents. That's just to name
>>>> a few.
>>>>
>>>> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces
>>>> from all currency, tear down their preserved mansions
>>>> and monuments. Even Lincoln was a racist. He freed
>>>> the blacks but he had no love for them.
>>>> We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
>>>>
>>>> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying
>>>> is just that...crap. Time to move on people and quit
>>>> bitching about the past that can't be changed.
>>>>
>>>> And in the black community, clean up your own act then
>>>> the police won't go so hard on you.
>>>
>>> My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically, she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
>>>
>> People that actually know history also know Washington freed his slaves.
>> They don't hold grudges against everything that happened over 200
>> years ago. It was never right to own slaves but it was not seen that
>> way at the time. Same as many other habits and traditions from the
>> past. We pretty much got rid of human sacrifice and cannibalism too.
>>
>> Despite having been an active slave holder for 56 years, George
>> Washington struggled with the institution of slavery and spoke
>> frequently of his desire to end the practice. At the end of his life,
>> Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will -
>> the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
>>
>> Jefferson only freed a handful but made some attempts to treat them ore
>> humanely.
>
> You're not saying anything that isn't common knowledge.
>
Sorry I disappointed you.

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 4:17:38 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 6/21/2020 3:49 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >>> Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
> >>> with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> >>>
> >>> Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
> >>> a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
> >>> breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
> >>> Aunt like her.
> >>
> >> Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
> >> line?
> >>
> >> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
> >> that of getting rid of her.
> >>
> >> Cindy Hamilton
> >
> > Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
> >
> Then why change it? It was put there for a reason but now they are
> pandering for profit. Product recognition is good but now it has to
> change.

They're shit-scared. They're afraid of seeing the the headline:
"The Quaker Oat Company Are a Bunch of Big, Fat Racists", whether
they deserve it or not.

They could have changed the branding at any time. It's not like
it's news that someone might think Aunt Jemima is a demeaning
symbol. They already changed her appearance. Removing her
altogether was only a matter of time.

Cindy Hamilton

On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> As it goes Hawaii never had slaves - unless you call indentured servitude or working for low, low, wages slavery. In modern times it would be called "slavery", back then it was business as usual.
>
> That's true. In the beginning of modern times many chinese were
> brought in to work the new pineapple fields. They worked hard,
> eventually paid off their debt then started buying land and
> started their own businesses.
>
> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>
There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days Some
of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a term of
unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily. They were
basically slaves.

dsi1 wrote:

> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:47:10 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> > dsi1 wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 8:11:29 AM UTC-10, GM wrote:
> > > > Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 6/21/2020 12:35 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> > > > > >> dsi1 wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Sure, why not use a reminder of a horrible past to sell product? What's the harm? Let's change the pancake box mascot to Cousin Anne and sell product aimed at holocaust survivors and neo-nazis. Yeah, that might make some profits for the company. In the end, profits are the only thing that matter.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> True. In the end, profits DO matter.
> > > > > >> Don't you have a retirement account? Investing your savings
> > > > > >> for retirement in evil corporations and hoping they will
> > > > > >> earn you the best return?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> As far as past reminders of our history, let's tear down
> > > > > >> all reminders of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
> > > > > >> USAs most beloved past presidents. That's just to name
> > > > > >> a few.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces
> > > > > >> from all currency, tear down their preserved mansions
> > > > > >> and monuments. Even Lincoln was a racist. He freed
> > > > > >> the blacks but he had no love for them.
> > > > > >> We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying
> > > > > >> is just that...crap. Time to move on people and quit
> > > > > >> bitching about the past that can't be changed.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And in the black community, clean up your own act then
> > > > > >> the police won't go so hard on you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically, she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
> > > > > >
> > > > > People that actually know history also know Washington freed his slaves.
> > > > > They don't hold grudges against everything that happened over 200
> > > > > years ago. It was never right to own slaves but it was not seen that
> > > > > way at the time. Same as many other habits and traditions from the
> > > > > past. We pretty much got rid of human sacrifice and cannibalism too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Despite having been an active slave holder for 56 years, George
> > > > > Washington struggled with the institution of slavery and spoke
> > > > > frequently of his desire to end the practice. At the end of his life,
> > > > > Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will -
> > > > > the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jefferson only freed a handful but made some attempts to treat them ore
> > > > > humanely.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you...
> > > >
> > > > Historical revisionism can be extended to absurd lengths, any past historical figure can be held up to scrutiny, but we have the luxury of hindsight, they did not. FDR interned the Japanese, but he led us through the Depression and WWII...Churchill was a "colonialist" and held what we now know are racist views but he led the UK and the Allied alliance through WWII....LBJ had segregationist views, but when he became POTUS he pushed through important civil rights legislation...and a million more examples.
> > > >
> > > > My "metric" is "Did these figures leave the world a better place?"....the above examples, despite their flaws, did on - balance IMNSHO...
> > > >
> > > > There is a current discussion on an East German history FB group I participate in, it is about the Lenin statue just erected by a far - left group in a small German town. Some on the group are defending Lenin, claiming that the Bolsheviks "despite their flaws" made the USSR into a modern nation, others say (myself among them, though I am not in the discussion anymore) that his bloody tactics led to the 100 million dead that communism/socialism are responsible for. Their are similar arguments for Stalin, that despite the purges and the millions dead by his hand, that he led the USSR to victory over the Nazis. Same arguements I've seen about Castro, etc....and there are still a few odd ducks out there who actually *defend* the building of the Berlin Wall...and so on!
> > > >
> > > > Lenin, Castro and their ilk have NOT left the world a better place overall according to my historial metrics, so they should be condemned and not nicely commemorated...
> > > >
> > > > Thing is, many in their "rush to historical judgement" do not know history, thus we have the present - day US "progressives" dissing Washington, Jefferson, even Lincoln. And some BLM and other activists disrespect the actions of MLK, Rosa Parks, Marian Anderson, many others...
> > > >
> > > > I'm just sayin...
> > > >
> > > > ;-)
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best
> > > > Greg
> > >
> > > Indeed, you are just sayin. People's "metrics" are mostly rationalizations so they can see the world the way that need to. Every country will see their history and historical figures in whichever way that need to.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > "In the end, whether one views things in the past in a favorable light or not matters about as much as what their favorite color is..."
> >
> >
> > An inane statement on your part...you've a very "flip" attitude towards life...
> >
> > --
> > Best
> > Greg
>
> So you think Stalin is one cool cat. So whaddaya want - medal?
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesro.../#162fd4ee3366


*I* did not say that...

Honestly, your mental state is much inferior to even a low - grade moron like John Kuthe, you cannot understand nor comprehend basic Engrish...yer brain is a poi - addled MUSH...please smoke MORE pot...

--
Best
Greg

On 6/21/2020 2:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:

>
> You're not saying anything that isn't common knowledge.
>

I feel bad about that too so I'm going to make up for it and post
something many of us don't know about. Maybe you can even contribute a
favorite Poi Dog recipe.

https://www.airtohawaii.com/whats-poi-dog/

The poi dog was an important animal that the ancient Hawaiians
domesticated. But they usually did not treat it as a pet. Instead, like
the pig and chicken, the ancient Hawaiians used it as an important
source of food protein. More often than not, the ancient Hawaiians fed
the dog poi the Hawaiian staple made from fermented taro. This was poi
and this is how the poi dog breed got its name.

Because it primarily ate poi, the animal, over time, tended to become
heavy set and sedentary. But this was ideal for the ancient Hawaiians.
This was because poi dogs, with plump and soft bodies, were primarily
meant to be eaten as food. Ancient Hawaiians prized roasted dogs,
especially young puppies, and considered them a delicacy.

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 10:17:38 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 6/21/2020 3:49 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >>> Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
> >>> with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> >>>
> >>> Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
> >>> a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
> >>> breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
> >>> Aunt like her.
> >>
> >> Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
> >> line?
> >>
> >> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
> >> that of getting rid of her.
> >>
> >> Cindy Hamilton
> >
> > Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
> >
> Then why change it? It was put there for a reason but now they are
> pandering for profit. Product recognition is good but now it has to
> change.

This isn't the 60's any longer that kind of stuff don't fly in the modern world. Back in the 70's, the boomers were king. In the 20's nobody is really interested in what the boomers are having for breakfast because it's the millennials that have taken over the crown. Having a black mammy on a box is viral dynamite that's going to go off sooner or later. It's not personal, it's just business.

On 2020-06-21 12:35 p.m., dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:

>> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces from all
>> currency, tear down their preserved mansions and monuments. Even
>> Lincoln was a racist. He freed the blacks but he had no love for
>> them. We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
>>
>> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying is just
>> that...crap. Time to move on people and quit bitching about the
>> past that can't be changed.
>>
>> And in the black community, clean up your own act then the police
>> won't go so hard on you.
>
> My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave
> owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically,
> she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two
> founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
>

We had an issue with a local school being renamed in honour of
Wellington. The main reason for the opposition was that they had
closed two schools and merged them into one. People wanted the old name
to stick. One of the lame reasons not to name it after Wellington was
that he was alleged to have been anti Semitic. It was the early 1800s.
Most people in England were probably anti Semitic back then.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 16:39:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2020-06-21 12:35 p.m., dsi1 wrote:
>> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>>> dsi1 wrote:
>
>>> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces from all
>>> currency, tear down their preserved mansions and monuments. Even
>>> Lincoln was a racist. He freed the blacks but he had no love for
>>> them. We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
>>>
>>> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying is just
>>> that...crap. Time to move on people and quit bitching about the
>>> past that can't be changed.
>>>
>>> And in the black community, clean up your own act then the police
>>> won't go so hard on you.
>>
>> My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave
>> owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically,
>> she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two
>> founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
>>
>
>We had an issue with a local school being renamed in honour of
>Wellington. The main reason for the opposition was that they had
>closed two schools and merged them into one. People wanted the old name
>to stick. One of the lame reasons not to name it after Wellington was
>that he was alleged to have been anti Semitic. It was the early 1800s.
>Most people in England were probably anti Semitic back then.

Simple: don't name things after English people from the early 1800s.

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 10:35:00 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 6/21/2020 2:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >
> > You're not saying anything that isn't common knowledge.
> >
>
> I feel bad about that too so I'm going to make up for it and post
> something many of us don't know about. Maybe you can even contribute a
> favorite Poi Dog recipe.
>
> https://www.airtohawaii.com/whats-poi-dog/
>
> The poi dog was an important animal that the ancient Hawaiians
> domesticated. But they usually did not treat it as a pet. Instead, like
> the pig and chicken, the ancient Hawaiians used it as an important
> source of food protein. More often than not, the ancient Hawaiians fed
> the dog poi the Hawaiian staple made from fermented taro. This was poi
> and this is how the poi dog breed got its name.
>
> Because it primarily ate poi, the animal, over time, tended to become
> heavy set and sedentary. But this was ideal for the ancient Hawaiians.
> This was because poi dogs, with plump and soft bodies, were primarily
> meant to be eaten as food. Ancient Hawaiians prized roasted dogs,
> especially young puppies, and considered them a delicacy.

As far as I know, the Hawaiians don't eat dog any more. The Filipinos still do. Well, at least the old ones still do. I doubt the kids go for that kind of fare these days. They'd rather eat green bean casserole. People on the mainland don't like the idea of eating dogs but I don't have a problem with it. The local joke is that the Filipinos think that the black dog is the best tasting. We used to have a black dog so there was a lot of joking around about Filipinos stealing our dog for eat at one party. It's one of the perks of owning a black dog.

As far as poi dogs goes, I like those dogs. They seem to have a lot of spunk.

http://archives.starbulletin.com/200...s/story02.html

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT), dsi1
> wrote:

>> The poi dog was an important animal that the ancient Hawaiians
>> domesticated. But they usually did not treat it as a pet. Instead, like
>> the pig and chicken, the ancient Hawaiians used it as an important
>> source of food protein. More often than not, the ancient Hawaiians fed
>> the dog poi the Hawaiian staple made from fermented taro. This was poi
>> and this is how the poi dog breed got its name.
>>
>> Because it primarily ate poi, the animal, over time, tended to become
>> heavy set and sedentary. But this was ideal for the ancient Hawaiians.
>> This was because poi dogs, with plump and soft bodies, were primarily
>> meant to be eaten as food. Ancient Hawaiians prized roasted dogs,
>> especially young puppies, and considered them a delicacy.
>
>As far as I know, the Hawaiians don't eat dog any more. The Filipinos still do.
>Well, at least the old ones still do. I doubt the kids go for that
>kind of fare these days. They'd rather eat green bean casserole.
>People on the mainland don't like the idea of eating dogs but I don't
>have a problem with it.

That's because you're an old boomer. With old boomer ideas.

dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 10:17:38 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 6/21/2020 3:49 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 12:27:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>> Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew up
>>>>> with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was just
>>>>> a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a good
>>>>> breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone had an
>>>>> Aunt like her.
>>>>
>>>> Does anybody think this is about something besides Quaker Oats' bottomWhy
>>>> line?
>>>>
>>>> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
>>>> that of getting rid of her.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
>>>
>> Then why change it? It was put there for a reason but now they are
>> pandering for profit. Product recognition is good but now it has to
>> change.
>
> This isn't the 60's any longer that kind of stuff don't fly in the modern world. Back in the 70's, the boomers were king. In the 20's nobody is really interested in what the boomers are having for breakfast because it's the millennials that have taken over the crown. Having a black mammy on a box is viral dynamite that's going to go off sooner or later. It's not personal, it's just business.
>

Yoose right. If the image of a black lady on a bottle of syrup is
going to cause millenials to riot, it's not worth it.

The old guys can just print out mammy jemima's picture, glue it on
the damn bottle, and enjoy their breakfast.

Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 16:39:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2020-06-21 12:35 p.m., dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 3:04:13 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>> Both were slave owners. We should remove their faces from all
>>>> currency, tear down their preserved mansions and monuments. Even
>>>> Lincoln was a racist. He freed the blacks but he had no love for
>>>> them. We could even rename Washington DC to MLK DC.
>>>>
>>>> All lives do matter but all this old slavery crying is just
>>>> that...crap. Time to move on people and quit bitching about the
>>>> past that can't be changed.
>>>>
>>>> And in the black community, clean up your own act then the police
>>>> won't go so hard on you.
>>>
>>> My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave
>>> owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically,
>>> she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two
>>> founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
>>>
>>
>> We had an issue with a local school being renamed in honour of
>> Wellington. The main reason for the opposition was that they had
>> closed two schools and merged them into one. People wanted the old name
>> to stick. One of the lame reasons not to name it after Wellington was
>> that he was alleged to have been anti Semitic. It was the early 1800s.
>> Most people in England were probably anti Semitic back then.
>
> Simple: don't name things after English people from the early 1800s.
>

Or black folks in the early 1900's.

Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT), dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>>> The poi dog was an important animal that the ancient Hawaiians
>>> domesticated. But they usually did not treat it as a pet. Instead, like
>>> the pig and chicken, the ancient Hawaiians used it as an important
>>> source of food protein. More often than not, the ancient Hawaiians fed
>>> the dog poi the Hawaiian staple made from fermented taro. This was poi
>>> and this is how the poi dog breed got its name.
>>>
>>> Because it primarily ate poi, the animal, over time, tended to become
>>> heavy set and sedentary. But this was ideal for the ancient Hawaiians.
>>> This was because poi dogs, with plump and soft bodies, were primarily
>>> meant to be eaten as food. Ancient Hawaiians prized roasted dogs,
>>> especially young puppies, and considered them a delicacy.
>>
>> As far as I know, the Hawaiians don't eat dog any more. The Filipinos still do.
>> Well, at least the old ones still do. I doubt the kids go for that
>> kind of fare these days. They'd rather eat green bean casserole.
>> People on the mainland don't like the idea of eating dogs but I don't
>> have a problem with it.
>
> That's because you're an old boomer. With old boomer ideas.
>

When you sniff a boomer, can you tell right off Druce?

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 11:35:26 AM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>
> My wife has a problem with Washington and Jefferson being slave owners. I don't have any particular feelings about it. Logically, she's right, of course. My guess is, that in the future, these two founding fathers are going to go down too. It might be real soon.
>
She'll get her panties in a knot when she learns Alexander Hamilton, James
Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, John Tyler, and Zachary Taylor were all slave owners. By the way, Lincoln's plan was to provide
passage back to Africa to the country of Liberia or to Central America.

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 12:45:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> At the end of his life,
> Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will -
> the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
>
Actually Washington said his slaves would be freed upon Martha's death.
She was terrified they would kill or poison her to hasten their freedom
so she freed them soon after George's death.

On 2020-06-21 3:49 p.m., dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

>> Obviously they feel the risk of keeping Auntie J is greater than
>> that of getting rid of her.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
> Why yes, it's always all about the money. What I don't get is why
> someone would give a **** about whose picture is on the cover of
> product. Are these people so OCD that they need that picture of some
> fictitious character nearby so they can feel right about eating some
> lousy pancakes? Why yes, undoubtedly.
>

You can't win. If they don't have enough diverse actors in commercials
and other advertising there are people who will complain. When they use
the image of a woman who made a lot of money flogging her image they
complain. It's time for people to take a stand and tell the protestors
to pound salt. Let them go ahead and protest. There will be so many
protests going on that people just won't care anymore. Look at the Me
Too movement and the way male celebrities were facinf allegations of
sexual improprieties. After a few weeks there were so many of them they
people stopped caring.

wrote:

> On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 10:09:22 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >
> > Your sad opinion. Because of my house cleaning comment? When I
> > was looking to make a few extra bucks I washed windows. Slave
> > wages? I pay my cleaning lady 33% more per hour than a nurse we
> > know here.
> >
> Maybe she can't afford to hire a house cleaner but no need for her to
> get bent out of shape because you can. I don't know about other
> places but most of the house cleaners here are white folks. And they
> bring in some big bucks for their services. It's a very lucrative
> business here but I'm not sure how they've fared since the shutdown
> and so many folks not working and can't afford them now.

Same here. Most are white.

Julie Bove wrote:

>
> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On 6/17/2020 12:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> > > On 2020-06-17 12:27 p.m., Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We
> > > > grew up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> > > >
> > > > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she
> > > > was just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to
> > > > have a good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place
> > > > if everyone had an Aunt like her.
> > >
> > >
> > > Never underestimate the need for some people to feel the need to
> > > be offended. Granted, the old image of Aunt Jemima did have that
> > > antebellum air about it, but it had been updated years ago and
> > > simply showed a black woman. I agree that she was just a
> > > familiar face. Companies will be afraid to use black people as
> > > their spokespeople for fear that someone will feel a need to
> > > whine about, and then they will complain that the are not
> > > represented in commercial placement.
> > >
> >
> > I see commercials all the time that have token minorities in them.
> > It will be more racist if they replace her with a white woman.
> >
> > Is Uncle Ben next?
>
> Yep. I heard that's going too.

Sad. That one was a real person. A black businessman of the 1940's
who sold a quality rice.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 18:41:59 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>Julie Bove wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On 6/17/2020 12:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> > > On 2020-06-17 12:27 p.m., Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > > > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We
>> > > > grew up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
>> > > >
>> > > > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she
>> > > > was just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to
>> > > > have a good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place
>> > > > if everyone had an Aunt like her.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Never underestimate the need for some people to feel the need to
>> > > be offended. Granted, the old image of Aunt Jemima did have that
>> > > antebellum air about it, but it had been updated years ago and
>> > > simply showed a black woman. I agree that she was just a
>> > > familiar face. Companies will be afraid to use black people as
>> > > their spokespeople for fear that someone will feel a need to
>> > > whine about, and then they will complain that the are not
>> > > represented in commercial placement.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I see commercials all the time that have token minorities in them.
>> > It will be more racist if they replace her with a white woman.
>> >
>> > Is Uncle Ben next?
>>
>> Yep. I heard that's going too.
>
>Sad. That one was a real person. A black businessman of the 1940's
>who sold a quality rice.

If he'd been a white man called Ben Jones, would the rice also have
been called Uncle Ben? Or would it have been called Mr Jones rice? Or
Colonel Jones rice?

dsi1 wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 6:27:07 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew
> > up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> >
> > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was
> > just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a
> > good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone
> > had an Aunt like her.
>
> The call her "aunt" but she's not really your auntie. She'd be your
> mammy - a low-paid hired help that raised you from a baby. That
> concept is a pretty weird one in this day and age. Perhaps they can
> change her into a nice white lady. Then she'd be like a real aunt.

You miss a beat yet again on Southern USA. It probably DOES sound odd
outside of it but 'aunt' or 'uncle' may have become something racist
long ago but words change ib usage all the time. In the roaring 20's
to call someone '***' meant they were light hearted and full of fun.
Today, totally different.

Calling any one 'aunt or 'uncle' who actually isn't fell out of common
use when I was about 20 but it's still used today. It has no
connotation of color attached. It is related to 'a person so close to
your parents they could be brother or sister' hence 'Aunt' or 'Uncle'.
Aunt is more common. It's used by a younger person to refer to them by
first name but with a respect title.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 18:59:17 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>dsi1 wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 6:27:07 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew
>> > up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
>> >
>> > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was
>> > just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a
>> > good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone
>> > had an Aunt like her.
>>
>> The call her "aunt" but she's not really your auntie. She'd be your
>> mammy - a low-paid hired help that raised you from a baby. That
>> concept is a pretty weird one in this day and age. Perhaps they can
>> change her into a nice white lady. Then she'd be like a real aunt.
>
>You miss a beat yet again on Southern USA. It probably DOES sound odd
>outside of it but 'aunt' or 'uncle' may have become something racist
>long ago but words change ib usage all the time. In the roaring 20's
>to call someone '***' meant they were light hearted and full of fun.
>Today, totally different.

Totally different? Are you saying homosexuals can't be lighthearted
and full of fun???

On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>
>>> As it goes Hawaii never had slaves - unless you call indentured
>>> servitude or working for low, low, wages slavery. In modern times it
>>> would be called "slavery", back then it was business as usual.
>>
>> That's true. In the beginning of modern times many chinese were
>> brought in to work the new pineapple fields. They worked hard,
>> eventually paid off their debt then started buying land and
>> started their own businesses.
>>
>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>>
> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days Some
> of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a term of
> unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They were
> basically slaves.

Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
in Virginia. If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
they'd have been treated no better than any other slave. They were
bought and paid for.

Jill

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 1:59:24 PM UTC-10, cshenk wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 6:27:07 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew
> > > up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
> > >
> > > Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was
> > > just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a
> > > good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone
> > > had an Aunt like her.
> >
> > The call her "aunt" but she's not really your auntie. She'd be your
> > mammy - a low-paid hired help that raised you from a baby. That
> > concept is a pretty weird one in this day and age. Perhaps they can
> > change her into a nice white lady. Then she'd be like a real aunt.
>
> You miss a beat yet again on Southern USA. It probably DOES sound odd
> outside of it but 'aunt' or 'uncle' may have become something racist
> long ago but words change ib usage all the time. In the roaring 20's
> to call someone '***' meant they were light hearted and full of fun.
> Today, totally different.
>
> Calling any one 'aunt or 'uncle' who actually isn't fell out of common
> use when I was about 20 but it's still used today. It has no
> connotation of color attached. It is related to 'a person so close to
> your parents they could be brother or sister' hence 'Aunt' or 'Uncle'.
> Aunt is more common. It's used by a younger person to refer to them by
> first name but with a respect title.

Are you saying that it would be okay for a colored person that you don't know to call you "auntie?" That sounds a little weird for the American South. It's perfectly normal on this rock.

Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 18:59:17 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 6:27:07 AM UTC-10, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> Is nothing sacred? After 130 years an old friend is gone. We grew
>>>> up with Aunt Jemima for breakfast but she is going away.
>>>>
>>>> Some have considered the familiar figure racists but to me, she was
>>>> just a familiar face, a nice lady that just wanted you to have a
>>>> good breakfast. IMO, the world would be a better place if everyone
>>>> had an Aunt like her.
>>>
>>> The call her "aunt" but she's not really your auntie. She'd be your
>>> mammy - a low-paid hired help that raised you from a baby. That
>>> concept is a pretty weird one in this day and age. Perhaps they can
>>> change her into a nice white lady. Then she'd be like a real aunt.
>>
>> You miss a beat yet again on Southern USA. It probably DOES sound odd
>> outside of it but 'aunt' or 'uncle' may have become something racist
>> long ago but words change ib usage all the time. In the roaring 20's
>> to call someone '***' meant they were light hearted and full of fun.
>> Today, totally different.
>
> Totally different? Are you saying homosexuals can't be lighthearted
> and full of fun???
>

Yeah. Popeye certainly is.

On 2020-06-21 8:14 p.m., jmcquown wrote:
> On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:

>>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
>>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>>>
>> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days
>> Some of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a
>> term of unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They
>> were basically slaves.
>
> Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
> charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
> in Virginia.Â* If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
> and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
> they'd have been treated no better than any other slave.Â* They were
> bought and paid for.

Yep. Forget about the taxation without representation and the other
issues that most American school children were indoctrinated into
accepting as fact. A significant portion of the population of the
American colonies were indentured servants who dealt with years of
virtual slavery, and another significant portion of the population were
convicts who had been transported to the colonies as punishment. After
the revolution the British had to start sending their riffraff to
Australia. There was no love lost between the convicts and indentured
slaves and jolly old England.

On 2020-06-21 8:14 p.m., jmcquown wrote:
> On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As it goes Hawaii never had slaves - unless you call indentured
>>>> servitude or working for low, low, wages slavery. In modern times it
>>>> would be called "slavery", back then it was business as usual.
>>>
>>> That's true. In the beginning of modern times many chinese were
>>> brought in to work the new pineapple fields. They worked hard,
>>> eventually paid off their debt then started buying land and
>>> started their own businesses.
>>>
>>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
>>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>>>
>> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days
>> Some of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a
>> term of unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They
>> were basically slaves.
>
> Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
> charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
> in Virginia.Â* If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
> and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
> they'd have been treated no better than any other slave.Â* They were
> bought and paid for.
>
> Jill

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 20:56:26 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2020-06-21 8:14 p.m., jmcquown wrote:
>> On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> As it goes Hawaii never had slaves - unless you call indentured
>>>>> servitude or working for low, low, wages slavery. In modern times it
>>>>> would be called "slavery", back then it was business as usual.
>>>>
>>>> That's true. In the beginning of modern times many chinese were
>>>> brought in to work the new pineapple fields. They worked hard,
>>>> eventually paid off their debt then started buying land and
>>>> started their own businesses.
>>>>
>>>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
>>>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>>>>
>>> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days
>>> Some of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a
>>> term of unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They
>>> were basically slaves.
>>
>> Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
>> charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
>> in Virginia.Â* If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
>> and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
>> they'd have been treated no better than any other slave.Â* They were
>> bought and paid for.
>>
>> Jill

One of Dave's better posts.

On 6/21/2020 8:56 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2020-06-21 8:14 p.m., jmcquown wrote:
>> On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
>
>>>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
>>>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
>>>>
>>> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days
>>> Some of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a
>>> term of unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They
>>> were basically slaves.
>>
>> Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
>> charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco
>> farmer in Virginia.Â* If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the
>> voyage and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of
>> the ship, they'd have been treated no better than any other slave.
>> They were bought and paid for.
>
> Yep. Forget about the taxation without representation and the other
> issues that most American school children were indoctrinated into
> accepting as fact. A significant portion of the population of the
> American colonies were indentured servants who dealt with years of
> virtual slavery, and another significant portion of the population were
> convicts who had been transported to the colonies as punishment. After
> the revolution the British had to start sending their riffraff to
> Australia.Â* There was no love lost between the convicts and indentured
> slaves and jolly old England.
>
The Battle of Bothwell Bridge was a religious fight, as most of those
situations always are. Politics and religion have always been neck and
neck. So yeah, they sold people into what amounted to slavery in the
name of the Lord and King (Charles II). Fun times!

Fortunately, the Captain of the ship died. The ship was diverted to New
Jersey. The Scots named the port where they landed "Perth Amboy" after
their Scottish homeland, Perth.

Really, if they'd landed the ship in Virginia my ancestors would haven't
been treated any better than black or brown people on a tobacco plantation.

Jill

On Sunday, June 21, 2020 at 2:55:41 PM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2020-06-21 8:14 p.m., jmcquown wrote:
> > On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> >> On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
>
> >>> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
> >>> the salmon canning in Alaska.
> >>>
> >> There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days
> >> Some of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a
> >> term of unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.Â* They
> >> were basically slaves.
> >
> > Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
> > charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
> > in Virginia.Â* If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
> > and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
> > they'd have been treated no better than any other slave.Â* They were
> > bought and paid for.
>
> Yep. Forget about the taxation without representation and the other
> issues that most American school children were indoctrinated into
> accepting as fact. A significant portion of the population of the
> American colonies were indentured servants who dealt with years of
> virtual slavery, and another significant portion of the population were
> convicts who had been transported to the colonies as punishment. After
> the revolution the British had to start sending their riffraff to
> Australia. There was no love lost between the convicts and indentured
> slaves and jolly old England.

In America, in the year 2020 of our lord, people are still getting paid slave wages.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh4nhkuvuFc

dsi1 wrote:
> In America, in the year 2020 of our lord, people are still getting paid slave wages.

But only if they agree to taking the job. People with no skills
don't have many choices.
I heard a brief news thing last week that TARGET is going to
start paying all employees at least $15 per hour and some bonus
money for cashiers. All starting in July? Not years from now.

Did I hear this wrong? It was only a very brief news bite.

That's a pretty good starting wage for uneducated people.

In article >,
says...
>
> On 6/21/2020 4:25 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> > On 2020-06-21 11:08 a.m., Gary wrote:
> >> dsi1 wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As it goes Hawaii never had slaves - unless you call indentured
> >>> servitude or working for low, low, wages slavery. In modern times it
> >>> would be called "slavery", back then it was business as usual.
> >>
> >> That's true. In the beginning of modern times many chinese were
> >> brought in to work the new pineapple fields. They worked hard,
> >> eventually paid off their debt then started buying land and
> >> started their own businesses.
> >>
> >> Same with building railroads on the mainland and even doing
> >> the salmon canning in Alaska.
> >>
> > There were a lot of indentured servants in the US in the early days Some
> > of them had signed up voluntarily with an agreement to provide a term of
> > unpaid employment. Some were indentured involuntarily.* They were
> > basically slaves.
>
> Like my ancestors, who were captured in battle in 1679 in England,
> charged with treason and sold as indentured servants to a tobacco farmer
> in Virginia. If the captain of the ship hadn't died during the voyage
> and the man who assumed command hadn't changed the course of the ship,
> they'd have been treated no better than any other slave. They were
> bought and paid for.
>
> Jill


If you're referring to the Battle of Bothwell Bridge in 1679. It
took place in Scotland, not England.


Janet UK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bothwell_Bridge

On Monday, June 22, 2020 at 1:03:54 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
> > In America, in the year 2020 of our lord, people are still getting paid slave wages.
>
> But only if they agree to taking the job. People with no skills
> don't have many choices.
> I heard a brief news thing last week that TARGET is going to
> start paying all employees at least $15 per hour and some bonus
> money for cashiers. All starting in July? Not years from now.
>
> Did I hear this wrong? It was only a very brief news bite.
>
> That's a pretty good starting wage for uneducated people.

The reality is that even uneducated people have to do things like pay for housing, food, transportation, childcare, utilities, and high speed internet.

dsi1 wrote:
> We visited the International Slavery Museum when we were in Liverpool. It was interesting and moving. The Brits abolished slavery about 30 years before the Yanks did. The difference, of course, is that they didn't have a civil war over the matter,

Again, the US Civil War wasn't about slavery.
The North was treating the South unfairly with economics.
They chose to leave the union. That's what the civil war
was all about.

I suspect Lincoln abolished slavery later just as pay backs
to the South for trying to divide us into two countries.

On Monday, June 22, 2020 at 8:15:05 AM UTC-4, dsi1 wrote:
> On Monday, June 22, 2020 at 1:03:54 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> > dsi1 wrote:
> > > In America, in the year 2020 of our lord, people are still getting paid slave wages.
> >
> > But only if they agree to taking the job. People with no skills
> > don't have many choices.
> > I heard a brief news thing last week that TARGET is going to
> > start paying all employees at least $15 per hour and some bonus
> > money for cashiers. All starting in July? Not years from now.
> >
> > Did I hear this wrong? It was only a very brief news bite.
> >
> > That's a pretty good starting wage for uneducated people.
>
> The reality is that even uneducated people have to do things like pay for housing, food, transportation, childcare, utilities, and high speed internet.

Birth control is cheap. Perhaps those uneducated people should pay for
education rather than childcare.

And I don't mean a four-year bachelor's degree.

Cindy Hamilton